New CMS Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Value Pathway After Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: Preparing for Mandatory Reporting.

This article discusses the implementation of a new Merit-Based Incentive Payment System Value Pathway (MVPs) applicable to elective total hip and total knee arthroplasty as created by Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) - the Improving Care for Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP (MVP ID: G0058). We describe specific quality measures, surgeon-hospital collaborations, future developments with Quality Payment Program, and how lessons from early implementation will empower clinicians to participate in the refining of this MVP. The CMS has designed MVPs as a subset of measures relevant to a specialty or medical condition, in an effort to reduce the burden of reporting and improve assessment of care quality. Physicians and payors must be mindful of detrimental effects these measures in their current form may have on surgeons, institutions, and patients, including disincentivizing care for sicker or more vulnerable populations, and increased administrative costs. Early voluntary participation is crucial to gain valuable experience for the orthopedic community and in an effort to work alongside CMS to maximize care while minimizing cost for patients and burden for providers.

Association of race and ethnicity with opioid prescribing for Medicare beneficiaries following total joint replacements.

BACKGROUND: Profound racial and ethnic disparities exist in the use and outcomes of total hip/knee replacements (total joint replacements [TJR]). Whether similar disparities extend to post-TJR pain management remains unknown. Our objective is to examine the association of race and ethnicity with opioid fills following elective TJRs for White, Black, and Hispanic Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: We used the 2019 national Medicare data to identify beneficiaries who underwent total hip/knee replacements. Primary outcomes were at least one opioid fill in the period from discharge to 30 days post-discharge, and 31-90 days following discharge. Secondary outcomes were morphine milligram equivalent per day and number of opioid fills. Key independent variable was patient race-ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic). We estimated multivariable hierarchical logistic regressions and two-part models with state-level clustering. RESULTS: Among 67,550 patients, 93.36% were White, 3.69% were Black, and 2.95% were Hispanic. Compared to White patients, more Black patients and fewer Hispanic patients filled an opioid script (84.10% [Black] and 80.11% [Hispanic] vs. 80.33% [White], p < 0.001) in the 30-day period. On multivariable analysis, Black patients had 18% higher odds of filling an opioid script in the 30-day period (odds ratio [OR]: 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.33, p = 0.004), and 39% higher odds in the 31-90-day period (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.26-1.54, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the endpoints between Hispanic and White patients in the 30-day period. However, Hispanic patients had 20% higher odds of filling an opioid script in the 31- to 90-day period (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.07-1.34, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Important race- and ethnicity-based differences exist in post-TJR pain management with opioids. The mechanisms leading to the higher use of opioids by racial/ethnic minority patients need to be carefully examined.

Demographics and Early Outcomes of Commercial Antibiotic Cement Usage for Infection Prophylaxis During Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Older Than 65 Years: An American Joint Replacement Registry Study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of antibiotic-laden bone cement (ALBC) for infection prophylaxis in the setting of primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. Using data from the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR), (1) we examined the demographics of ALBC usage in the United States and (2) identified the effect of prophylactic commercially available ALBC on early revision and readmission for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary TKA. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of the AJRR from 2017 to 2020. Patients older than 65 years undergoing primary cemented TKA with or without the use of commercially available antibiotic cement were eligible for inclusion (N = 251,506 patients). Data were linked to available Medicare claims to maximize revision outcomes. Demographics including age, sex, race/ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), preoperative inflammatory arthritis, region, and body mass index (BMI) class were recorded. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between the two outcome measures and ALBC usage. RESULTS: Patients undergoing cemented TKA with ALBC were more likely to be Non-Hispanic Black ( P < 0.001), have a CCI of 2 or 3 ( P < 0.001), reside in the South ( P < 0.001), and had a higher mean BMI ( P < 0.001). In the regression models, ALBC usage was associated with increased risk of 90-day revision for PJI (hazards ratio 2.175 [95% confidence interval] 1.698 to 2.787) ( P < 0.001) and was not associated with 90-day all-cause readmissions. Male sex, higher CCI, and BMI >35 were all independently associated with 90-day revision for PJI. DISCUSSION: The use of commercial ALBC in patients older than 65 years for primary TKA in the AJRR was not closely associated with underlying comorbidities suggesting that hospital-level and surgeon-level factors influence its use. In addition, ALBC use did not decrease the risk of 90-day revision for PJI and was not associated with 90-day readmission rates.

Association of Total Knee Replacement Removal From the Inpatient-Only List With Outpatient Surgery Utilization and Outcomes in Medicare Patients.

Importance: Little is known about the association of total knee replacement (TKR) removal from the Medicare inpatient-only (IPO) list in 2018 with outcomes in Medicare patients. Objective: To evaluate (1) patient factors associated with outpatient TKR use and (2) whether the IPO policy was associated with changes in postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing TKR. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included data from administrative claims from the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System. Included patients were Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries undergoing TKRs or total hip replacements (THRs) in New York State from 2016 to 2019. Multivariable generalized linear mixed models were used to identify patient factors associated with outpatient TKR use, and with a difference-in-differences strategy to examine association of the IPO policy with post-TKR outcomes relative to post-THR outcomes in Medicare patients. Data analysis was performed from 2021 to 2022. Exposures: IPO policy implementation in 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Use of outpatient or inpatient TKR; secondary outcomes included 30-day and 90-day readmissions, 30-day and 90-day postoperative emergency department visits, non-home discharge, and total cost of the surgical encounter. Results: A total of 37 588 TKR procedures were performed on 18 819 patients from 2016 to 2019, with 1684 outpatient TKR procedures from 2018 to 2019 (mean [SD] age, 73.8 [5.9] years; 12 240 female [65.0%]; 823 Hispanic [4.4%], 982 non-Hispanic Black [5.2%], 15 714 non-Hispanic White [83.5%]). Older (eg, age 75 years vs 65 years: adjusted difference, -1.65%; 95% CI, -2.31% to -0.99%), Black (-1.44%; 95% CI, -2.81% to -0.07%), and female patients (-0.91%; 95% CI, -1.52% to -0.29%), as well as patients treated in safety-net hospitals (disproportionate share hospital payments quartile 4: -18.09%; 95% CI, -31.81% to -4.36%), were less likely to undergo outpatient TKR. After IPO policy implementation in the TKR cohort, there were lower adjusted 30-day readmissions (adjusted difference [AD], -2.11%; 95% CI, -2.73% to -1.48%; P < .001), 90-day readmissions ( -3.23%; 95% CI, -4.04% to -2.42%; P < .001), 30-day ED visits ( -2.45%; 95% CI, -3.17% to -1.72%; P < .001), 90-day ED visits (-4.01%; 95% CI, -4.91% to -3.11%; P < .001) and higher cost per encounter ($2988; 95% CI, $415 to $5561; P = .03). However, these changes did not differ from changes in the THR cohort except for increased TKR cost of $770 per encounter ($770; 95% CI, $83 to $1457; P = .03) relative to THR. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients undergoing TKR and THR, we found that older, Black, and female patients and patients treated in safety-net hospitals may have had lesser access to outpatient TKRs highlighting concerns of disparities. IPO policy was not associated with changes in overall health care use or outcomes after TKR, except for an increase of $770 per TKR encounter.

Disparities in the Epidemiology and Management of Fragility Hip Fractures.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to synthesize the recently published scientific evidence on disparities in epidemiology and management of fragility hip fractures. RECENT FINDINGS: There have been a number of investigations focusing on the presence of disparities in the epidemiology and management of fragility hip fractures. Race-, sex-, geographic-, socioeconomic-, and comorbidity-based disparities have been the primary focus of these investigations. Comparatively fewer studies have focused on why these disparities may exist and interventions to reduce disparities. There are widespread and profound disparities in the epidemiology and management of fragility hip fractures. More studies are needed to understand why these disparities exist and how they can be addressed.

Association of Medicare Mandatory Bundled Payment Reform With Joint Replacement Surgery Use for Beneficiaries With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias.

Importance: Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) are a particularly vulnerable group in whom arthritis is a frequently occurring comorbidity. Medicare's mandatory bundled payment reform-the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model-was intended to improve quality and reduce spending in beneficiaries undergoing joint replacement surgical procedures for arthritis. In the absence of adjustment for clinical risk, hospitals may avoid performing elective joint replacements for beneficiaries with ADRD. Objective: To evaluate the association of the CJR model with utilization of joint replacements for Medicare beneficiaries with ADRD. Design Setting and Participants: This cohort study used national Medicare data from 2013 to 2017 and multivariable linear probability models and a triple differences estimation approach. Medicare beneficiaries with a diagnosis of arthritis were identified from 67 metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) mandated to participate in CJR and 104 control MSAs. Data were analyzed from July 2020 to July 2021. Exposures: Implementation of the CJR model in 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were separate binary indicators for whether or not a beneficiary underwent hip or knee replacement. Key independent variables were the MSA group, before-CJR and after-CJR phase, ADRD diagnosis, and their interactions. The linear probability models controlled for beneficiary characteristics, MSA fixed effects, and time trends. Results: The study included 24 598 729 beneficiary-year observations for 9 624 461 unique beneficiaries, of which 250 168 beneficiaries underwent hip and 474 751 underwent knee replacements. The mean (SD) age of the 2013 cohort was 77.1 (7.9) years, 3 110 922 (66.4%) were women, 3 928 432 (83.8%) were non-Hispanic White, 792 707 (16.9%) were dually eligible for Medicaid, and 885 432 (18.9%) had an ADRD diagnosis. Before CJR implementation, joint replacement rates were lower among beneficiaries with ADRD (hip replacements: 0.38% vs 1.17% for beneficiaries with and without ADRD, respectively; P < .001; knee replacements: 0.70% vs 2.25%; P < .001). After controlling for relevant covariates, CJR was associated with a 0.07-percentage-point decline in hip replacements for beneficiaries with ADRD (95% CI, -0.13 to -0.001; P = .046) and a 0.07-percentage-point decline for beneficiaries without ADRD (95% CI, -0.12 to -0.02; P = .01) residing in CJR MSAs compared with beneficiaries in control MSAs. However, this change in hip replacement rates for beneficiaries with ADRD was not statistically significantly different from the change for beneficiaries without ADRD (percentage point difference: 0.01; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.09; P = .88). No statistically significant changes in knee replacement rates were noted for beneficiaries with ADRD compared with those without ADRD with CJR implementation (percentage point difference: -0.03, 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.02; P = .27). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with arthritis, the CJR model was not associated with a decline in joint replacement utilization among beneficiaries with ADRD compared with beneficiaries without ADRD in the first 2 years of the program, thereby alleviating patient selection concerns.

Does Hypothetical Centralization of Revision THA and TKA Exacerbate Existing Geographic or Demographic Disparities in Access to Care by Increased Patient Travel Distances or Times? A Large-database Study.

BACKGROUND: Higher hospital volume is associated with lower rates of adverse outcomes after revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Centralizing revision TJA care to higher-volume hospitals might reduce early complication and readmission rates after revision TJA; however, the effect of centralizing revision TJA care on patient populations who are more likely to experience challenges with access to care is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does a hypothetical policy of transferring patients undergoing revision TJA from lower-to higher-volume hospitals increase patient travel distance and time? (2) Does a hypothetical policy of transferring patients undergoing revision TJA from lower- to higher-volume hospitals disproportionately affect travel distance or time in low income, rural, or racial/ethnic minority populations? METHODS: Using the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups 466-468, we identified 37,147 patients with inpatient stays undergoing revision TJA from 2008 to 2016 in the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System administrative database for New York State. Revisions with missing or out-of-state patient identifiers (3474 of 37,147) or those associated with closed or merged facilities (180 of 37,147) were excluded. We chose this database for our study because of relative advantages to other available databases: comprehensive catchment of all surgical procedures in New York State, regardless of payer; each patient can be followed across episodes of care and hospitals in New York State; and New York State has an excellent cross-section of hospital types for TJA, including rural and urban hospitals, critical access hospitals, and some of the highest-volume centers for TJA in the United States. We divided hospitals into quartiles based on the mean revision TJA volume. Overall, 80% (118 of 147) of hospitals were not for profit, 18% (26 of 147) were government owned, 78% (115 of 147) were located in urban areas, and 48% (70 of 147) had fewer than 200 beds. The mean patient age was 66 years old, 59% (19,888 of 33,493) of patients were females, 79% (26,376 of 33,493) were white, 82% (27,410 of 33,493) were elective admissions, and 56% (18,656 of 33,493) of admissions were from government insurance. Three policy scenarios were evaluated: transferring patients from the lowest 25% by volume hospitals, transferring patients in the lowest 50% by volume hospitals, and transferring patients in the lowest 75% by volume hospitals to the nearest higher-volume institution by distance. Patients who changed hospitals and travelled more than 60 miles or longer than 60 minutes with consideration for average traffic patterns after the policy was enacted were considered adversely affected. The secondary outcome of interest was the impact of the three centralization policies, as defined above, on lower-income, nonwhite, rural versus urban counties, and Hispanic ethnicity. RESULTS: Transferring patients from the lowest 25% by volume hospitals resulted in only one patient stay that was affected by an increase in travel distance and travel time. Transferring patients from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals resulted in 9% (3050 of 33,493) of patients being transferred, with only 1% (312 of 33,493) of patients affected by either an increased travel distance or travel time. Transferring patients from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals resulted in 28% (9323 of 33,493) of patients being transferred, with 2% (814 of 33,493) of patients affected by either an increased travel distance or travel time. Nonwhite patients were less likely to encounter an increased travel distance or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (odds ratio 0.31 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.65]; p = 0.002) or being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 0.10 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.15]; p < 0.001) than white patients were. Hispanic patients were more likely to experience increased travel distance or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 12.3 [95% CI 5.04 to 30.2]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 3.24 [95% CI 2.24 to 4.68]; p < 0.001) than non-Hispanic patients were. Patients from a county with a lower median income were more likely to experience increased travel distances or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 69.5 [95% CI 17.0 to 283]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 3.86 [95% CI 3.21 to 4.64]; p < 0.001) than patients from counties with a higher median income. Patients from rural counties were more likely to be affected after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 98 [95% CI 49.6 to 192.2]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 11.7 [95% CI 9.89 to 14.0]; p < 0.001) than patients from urban counties. CONCLUSION: Although centralizing revision TJA care to higher-volume institutions in New York State did not appear to increase the travel burden for most patients, policies that centralize revision TJA care will need to be carefully designed to minimize the disproportionate impact on patient populations that already face challenges with access to healthcare. Further studies should examine the feasibility of establishing centers of excellence designations for revision TJA, the effect of best practices adoption by lower volume institutions to improve revision TJA care, and the potential role of care-extending technology such as telemedicine to improve access to care to reduce the effects of travel distances on affected patient populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Association of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model With Disparities in the Use of Total Hip and Total Knee Replacement.

Importance: The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model is Medicare's mandatory bundled payment reform to improve quality and spending for beneficiaries who need total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR), yet it does not account for sociodemographic risk factors such as race/ethnicity and income. Results of this study could be the basis for a Medicare payment reform that addresses inequities in joint replacement care. Objective: To examine the association of the CJR model with racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in the use of elective THR and TKR among older Medicare beneficiaries after accounting for the population of patients who were at risk or eligible for these surgical procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used the 2013 to 2017 national Medicare data and multivariable logistic regressions with triple-differences estimation. Medicare beneficiaries who were aged 65 to 99 years, entitled to Medicare, alive at the end of the calendar year, and residing either in the 67 metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) mandated to participate in the CJR model or in the 104 control MSAs were identified. A subset of Medicare beneficiaries with a diagnosis of arthritis underwent THR or TKR. Data were analyzed from March to December 2020. Exposures: Implementation of the CJR model in 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were separate binary indicators for whether a beneficiary underwent THR or TKR. Key independent variables were MSA treatment status, pre- or post-CJR model implementation phase, combination of race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic beneficiaries) and dual eligibility, and their interactions. Logistic regression models were used to control for patient characteristics, MSA fixed effects, and time trends. Results: The 2013 cohort included 4 447 205 Medicare beneficiaries, of which 2 025 357 (45.5%) resided in MSAs with the CJR model. The cohort's mean (SD) age was 77.18 (7.95) years, and it was composed of 2 951 140 female (66.4%), 3 928 432 non-Hispanic White (88.3%), and 657 073 dually eligible (14.8%) beneficiaries. Before the CJR model implementation, rates were highest among non-Hispanic White non-dual-eligible beneficiaries at 1.25% (95% CI, 1.24%-1.26%) for THR use and 2.28% (95% CI, 2.26%-2.29%) for TKR use in MSAs with CJR model. Compared with MSAs without the CJR model and the analogous race/ethnicity and dual-eligibility group, the CJR model was associated with a 0.10 (95% CI, 0.05-0.15; P < .001) percentage-point increase in TKR use for non-Hispanic White non-dual-eligible beneficiaries, a 0.11 (95% CI, 0.004-0.21; P = .04) percentage-point increase for non-Hispanic White dual-eligible beneficiaries, a 0.15 (95% CI, -0.29 to -0.01; P = .04) percentage-point decrease for non-Hispanic Black non-dual-eligible beneficiaries, and a 0.18 (95% CI, -0.34 to -0.01; P = .03) percentage-point decrease for non-Hispanic Black dual-eligible beneficiaries. These CJR model-associated changes in TKR use were 0.25 (95% CI, -0.40 to -0.10; P = .001) percentage points lower for non-Hispanic Black non-dual-eligible beneficiaries and 0.27 (95% CI, -0.45 to -0.10; P = .002) percentage points lower for non-Hispanic Black dual-eligible beneficiaries compared with the model-associated changes for non-Hispanic White non-dual-eligible beneficiaries. No association was found between the CJR model and a widening of the THR use gap among race/ethnicity and dual eligibility groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study indicate that the CJR model was associated with a modest increase in the already substantial difference in TKR use among non-Hispanic Black vs non-Hispanic White beneficiaries; no difference was found for THR. These findings support the widespread concern that payment reform has the potential to exacerbate disparities in access to joint replacement care.

Geographic Variation and Disparities in Total Joint Replacement Use for Medicare Beneficiaries: 2009 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how the geographic variation and disparities in use of elective primary total hip and knee replacements for Medicare beneficiaries have evolved in recent years. The study objectives are to determine these variations and disparities, whether Black Medicare beneficiaries have continued to undergo fewer total hip replacements and total knee replacements across regions, and whether disparities affected all Black beneficiaries or mainly affected socioeconomically disadvantaged Black beneficiaries. METHODS: We used 2009 to 2017 Medicare enrollment and claims data to examine Hospital Referral Region (HRR)-level variation and disparities by race (non-Hispanic White and Black) and socioeconomic status (Medicare-only and dual eligibility for both Medicare and Medicaid). The outcomes were HRR-level age and sex-standardized total hip replacement and total knee replacement utilization rates for White Medicare-only beneficiaries, White dual-eligible beneficiaries, Black Medicare-only beneficiaries, and Black dual-eligible beneficiaries, and the differences in rates between these groups as a representation of disparities. The key exposure variables were race-socioeconomic group and year. We constructed multilevel mixed-effects linear regression models to estimate trends in total hip replacement and total knee replacement rates and to examine whether rates were lower in HRRs with high percentages of Black beneficiaries or dual-eligible beneficiaries. RESULTS: The study included 924,844 total hip replacements and 2,075,968 total knee replacements. In 2017, the mean HRR-level total hip replacement rate was 4.64 surgical procedures per 1,000 beneficiaries, and the mean HRR-level total knee replacement rate was 9.66 surgical procedures per 1,000 beneficiaries, with a threefold variation across HRRs. In 2017, the total hip replacement rate was 32% higher for White Medicare-only beneficiaries and 48% higher for Black Medicare-only beneficiaries than in 2009 (p < 0.001). However, because the surgical rates for White and Black dual-eligible beneficiaries remained unchanged over the study period, the 2017 Medicare-only and dual-eligible disparity for White beneficiaries increased by 0.75 surgical procedures per 1,000 from 2009 (40.98% increase; p = 0.03), and the disparity for Black beneficiaries by 1.13 surgical procedures per 1,000 beneficiaries (297.37% increase; p < 0.001). The total knee replacement disparities remained unchanged. Notably, the rates for White dual-eligible beneficiaries were significantly lower than those for Black Medicare-only beneficiaries (p < 0.001 for both total hip replacements and total knee replacements), and fewer surgical procedures were conducted in HRRs with a higher density of Black or dual-eligible beneficiaries. CONCLUSIONS: Although the total hip replacement use for Medicare-only beneficiaries of both races increased, disparities for White and Black dual-eligible beneficiaries (compared with their Medicare-only counterparts) are increasing. Efforts to improve equity must identify and address both racial and socioeconomic barriers and focus on regions with high concentrations of disadvantaged beneficiaries. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although total hip replacements and total knee replacements are highly successful surgical procedures for end-stage osteoarthritis, our findings show that, as recently as 2017, Black beneficiaries and those dual eligible for Medicaid (a proxy for socioeconomic status) are less likely to undergo these surgical procedures and that there is profound geographic variation in the use of these surgical procedures. This evidence is essential for the design and implementation of disparity-reduction strategies focused on patients, providers, and geographic areas that can potentially improve the equity in joint replacement care.

Impact of Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program Penalties on Hip and Knee Replacement Readmissions: Comparison of Hospitals at Risk of Varying Penalty Amounts.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the impact of the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) expansion to include readmissions following elective primary total hip and knee replacements; the expansion was finalized in 2013 and was implemented in 2014. We examined whether hospitals at risk of relatively large penalties from this expansion experienced greater declines in joint replacement readmissions compared with hospitals at risk of smaller penalties. METHODS: We used Medicare's 2009 to 2016 Hospital Compare data sets to examine the impact of the HRRP's expansion in the July 2013 to June 2016 period (post-expansion) compared with the July 2009 to June 2012 period (pre-expansion). The primary outcome was the hospital-level, 30-day, risk-standardized readmission rate (hereafter called the readmission rate) following joint replacement surgical procedures. We used the percentage of a hospital's total inpatient revenue attributed to Medicare (categorized into quartiles) to represent the risk of penalties. We used hierarchical linear regression models to examine the adjusted impact of the HRRP's expansion. RESULTS: Our study cohort included 2,326 acute care hospitals. In the pre-HRRP expansion phase, the mean readmission rate was 5.36% among hospitals with the highest proportion of Medicare revenues (quartile 4) and 5.46% among hospitals with the lowest proportion of Medicare revenues (quartile 1). With the HRRP expansion, the readmission rate declined by 18.92% (1.01 percentage points) among quartile-4 hospitals and by 17.97% (0.98 percentage point) among quartile-1 hospitals (p = 0.45). This nonsignificant difference in readmission rate declines between quartiles persisted in multivariable analysis (a decline of 18.41% [0.98 percentage point] in quartile 4 and a decline of 17.35% [0.94 percentage point] in quartile 1; p = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: The HRRP's expansion to include joint replacements did not lead to greater reductions in postoperative readmissions among hospitals at risk of larger penalties in comparison with hospitals at risk of smaller penalties. Readmission rates were declining at similar rates among all hospitals, before and after the HRRP's expansion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Readmissions and complications following joint replacements are measures of the quality of surgical care. These events have important clinical and economic implications for patients and providers. This study is clinically relevant because it examines whether policy interventions, such as the HRRP, have the potential to reduce these unintended consequences of surgical care.

2018 International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection: Research Priorities from the General Assembly Questions.

Musculoskeletal infections (MSKI) remain the bane of orthopedic surgery, and result in grievous illness and inordinate costs that threaten healthcare systems. As prevention, diagnosis, and treatment has remained largely unchanged over the last 50 years, a 2nd International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection (ICM 2018, https://icmphilly.com) was completed. Questions pertaining to all areas of MSKI were extensively researched to prepare recommendations, which were discussed and voted on by the delegates using the Delphi methodology. The questions, including the General Assembly (GA) results, have been published (GA questions). However, as critical outcomes include: (i) incidence and cost data that substantiate the problems, and (ii) establishment of research priorities; an ICM 2018 research workgroup (RW) was assembled to accomplish these tasks. Here, we present the result of the RW consensus on the current and projected incidence of infection, and the costs per patient, for all orthopedic subspecialties, which range from 0.1% to 30%, and $17,000 to $150,000. The RW also identified the most important research questions. The Delphi methodology was utilized to initially derive four objective criteria to define a subset of the 164 GA questions that are high priority for future research. Thirty-eight questions (23% of all GA questions) achieved the requisite > 70% agreement vote, and are highlighted in this Consensus article within six thematic categories: acute versus chronic infection, host immunity, antibiotics, diagnosis, research caveats, and modifiable factors. Finally, the RW emphasizes that without appropriate funding to address these high priority research questions, a 3rd ICM on MSKI to address similar issues at greater cost is inevitable.